WASHINGTON, D.C., June 18, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The House of Representatives has passed a bill that would restrict all abortions nationwide to the first 20 weeks of pregnancy.

The “Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act” (H.R. 1797), introduced by Arizona Republica Trent Franks, would end abortion after a point that scientists agree unborn children can feel pain.

In a nearly party-line vote, the measure passed 228-196.

Six Democrats voted yes. Six Republicans voted against the bill. Ten Congressmen did not vote. The full roll call, showing how every Congressman voted, is below.

Democrats who voted yes include: Henry Cuellar of Texas, Dan Lipinski of Illinois, Jim Matheson of Utah, Mike McIntyre of North Carolina, Collin Peterson of Minnesota, and Nick Rahall of West Virginia.

Republicans who voted against the bill include Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia, Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania, Rodney Frelinghuysen of New Jersey, Richard Hanna of New York, Jon Runyan of New Jersey, and Rob Woodall of Georgia.

"Passage of today's landmark bill marks the first time in history, in either chamber of the U.S. Congress, that affirmative protection has been extended to unborn children,” said Franks. “It is my prayer that today also marks a day when America finally opens her eyes to the humanity of these little victims and the inhumanity of what is being done to them."

Others in the pro-lifemovement expressed their joy at the bill's passage.

“This vote makes a statement in favor of life even though the Dem[ocrat]-controlled Senate likely won't move on it,” said Cheryl Sullenger, senior policy advisor for Operation Rescue. “Getting this far was a big deal.”

The legislation would affect the 300 abortionists who perform abortions after 20 weeks post-fertilization and an estimated 140 abortion providers who are willing to perform abortions at 24 weeks or later, according to a 2008 report from the Guttmacher Institute.

“Sadly, the politics of compromise has decided that one class of children—those conceived by rape or incest—do not deserve protection from the agony of literally being ripped apart.,” said GRTL President Dan Becker.

Georgia Congressmen Paul Broun and Rob Woodall were two of the six Republicans to vote nay.

Most of the nation's pro-life groups strongly supported the incremental measure as an improvement over existing policy. Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee, said, "Any lawmaker who votes to allow unlimited abortion in the sixth month or later is voting to encourage a continuation of the horrors associated with the likes of Kermit Gosnell."

“Do you think it's fair or proper for a body of men to solely determine one of the most important and private decisions a woman can make in regard to her own health and body?” she asked.

Democrats appeared eager to change the subject from the bill's purpose – ending the practice of late-term abortions that led to the abuses of Kermit Gosnell and others – to their familiar “War on Women” rhetoric.

“The bill is a direct threat to the privacy rights and health of every woman living in this country, and especially women of color,” said Rep. Barbara Lee, D-CA. She said minority members suffered even more “due to the terrible Hyde Amendment,” which forbids taxpayer funding of abortion.

We must be approaching an election year. While pro-life advocates understandably appreciate this bill which limits abortions, it remains that the states have never delegated to Congress via the Constitution the specific power to regulate either abortion or healthcare. So I think that the Houses’s bill is just pre-election year noise that incumbents are hoping will win a few conservative votes for them in 2014.

I see my so-called congressman (Yarmuth - RAT) didn’t vote. He was too busy at the ground breaking for the Ohio River Bridges project which he fought and delayed for the last 20 years and now wants everyone to believe he has always supported.

Democrats who voted yes include: Henry Cuellar of Texas, Dan Lipinski of Illinois, Jim Matheson of Utah, Mike McIntyre of North Carolina, Collin Peterson of Minnesota, and Nick Rahall of West Virginia. Republicans who voted against the bill include Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia, Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania, Rodney Frelinghuysen of New Jersey, Richard Hanna of New York, Jon Runyan of New Jersey, and Rob Woodall of Georgia.

10
posted on 06/18/2013 7:13:34 PM PDT
by SunkenCiv
(McCain or Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)

Republicans who voted against the bill include Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia, Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania, Rodney Frelinghuysen of New Jersey, Richard Hanna of New York, Jon Runyan of New Jersey, and Rob Woodall of Georgia.

The Senate needs to be cleaned out. Lysol, a high colonic, roto-rooter, something. Why is it such a cesspool? Apparently there is no companion bill for the Senate. The majority of Americans do not want abortion legal past the 5th month - about 2 to 1.

Anyone wanting on/off any of my ping lists, freepmail me.

18
posted on 06/18/2013 8:06:16 PM PDT
by little jeremiah
(Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)

JUDIE BROWN already attacking this bill 7 1/2 years ago:
Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kansas), with the encouragement of some national pro-life groups, introduced the bill (S.51) in the Senate last week. Pro-lifers need to wake up and recognize that the more we concede, the further we are from really saving women and children from the tragedy of abortion, said Brown. Abortion is a violent act that must never be condoned, supported, promoted or excused. Because of this undeniable truth, American Life League cannot favor such a flawed concept as the one that is represented in the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act.

This vote will mean nothing as far a law getting passed but it will provide an emotional “wedge issue” to keep Pro-Life supporters loyal to the GOP.

Voter guides will be published describing all those who voted for this as “Pro-Life” yet most abortions occur in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy.

In the past, the Pro-Life voter guides distributed at election time by the National Right To Life and its affiliates would describe someone who wanted abortion legal early in a pregnancy when 90 percent plus of them occur as “Pro-Abortion”.

Next year those who believe abortion should be legal early in pregnancy and are Pro-Abortion but voted for this will get “Pro-Life” labels put on them by the National Right To Life which has become a tool of the GOP Establishment.

29
posted on 06/18/2013 8:50:56 PM PDT
by Nextrush
(A BALANCED BUDGET NOW AND PRESIDENT SARAH PALIN ARE AT THE TOP OF MY LIST)

Good question. Observe that in both species the majority of members are asexual disposable workers and only the Royalty is allowed to directly reproduce.

This is the social model that is self-evident in Postgenderist/Transhumanist doctrine and the occult abomination of nature therein -- where we "breeders" are just an inconvenience to be tolerated until the Übertermites can perfect their frankenscience.

{ isn't that right peanuts? }

30
posted on 06/18/2013 8:51:29 PM PDT
by TArcher
("TO SECURE THESE RIGHTS, governments are instituted among men" -- Does that still work?)

Do you think states should have the right, under the 10th amendment, to legalize murder of those already born? Or just those not born yet?

Abortion is murder. But as evidenced by my previous post, I don't think that conservatives in Congress are serious about the bill, incumbents just using it to win votes for 2014 imo. If it passes the Senate then please send me a note.

Regarding the murder of those already born, and with all due respect to family and supporters of the late Terry Schiavo, the Supreme Court properly regarded her euthenasia as a state power issue imo. But as a consequence of probably not understanding 10th Amendment protected state sovereignty, I would be surprized if Florida voters have worked with their state's lawmakers to make Florida's life & death laws more compassionate for people like Terri.

Again, one of the main reasons that we are having problems with tyrannical federal and state governments is because low-information voters are not aware of the Founding States' division of federal and state government powers evidenced by the Constitution's Section 8 of Article I, Article V and the 10th Amendment.

Jim Matheson voted “AYE”, someone is ascared. Unless I was mistaken in thinking him ‘pro-choice’.

“Republicans who voted against the bill include Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia, Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania, Rodney Frelinghuysen of New Jersey, Richard Hanna of New York, Jon Runyan of New Jersey, and Rob Woodall of Georgia.”

What’s up with those GA libertarians? Broun is running for the Senate.

God bless the American Life League! They stand for ALL the unborn. Isn’t this as Christ would do? The Good Shepherd? He would leave the 99 sheep in search of the one, lost sheep. This bill that the House has passed sacrifices the one, conceived in rape or incest. How does one’s conscience rationalize allowing these innocents to die a horribly painful, brutal death, because of the sins of his or her father?

And to call those who stand for all, innocent unborn babies morons? How is there a place for that kind of disdain for those we should see on the same side of defending life?

Absolutely! It’s just like the so-called “Partial Birth Abortion Ban” that so many pro-lifers celebrated when it was “upheld” by the U.S. Supreme Court. They celebrated the decision, but only because they didn’t READ the decision. It was basically a “how to” manual for the “acceptable” ways to kill babies late term.

So it is with this decision. It basically says that those conceived by rape or incest are less worthy of protection, and it’s ok for them to suffer horribly as they are dismembered after 20 weeks. It’s a pro-abortion bill with exceptions; not a pro-life bill. How can one be taken serious to say Baby A, conceived in a consensual sexual act, feels pain at 20 weeks, and so deserves to be protected in law from the brutality of abortion. But, Baby B, conceived in rape or incest; completely innocent of his or her father’s violent act, should be denied the same protection, and therefore suffer an agonizing death? It’s an incoherent argument. It’s insane!

But, furthermore, the whole argument is a false premise anyway. It focuses on a fuzzy line in the sand as to when an unborn child feels pain. Is it 20 weeks? Can a baby feel pain at 19 weeks? Earlier? The focus is on the wrong aspect entirely. The focus should be is it wrong to kill the unborn. Period. If it’s wrong, as hopefully most of us believe, then to support a piece of legislation that ends with, “and then you can kill the baby,” makes no rational sense.

“What do you think? If a man has a hundred sheep, and one of them has gone astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go in search of the one that went astray? And if he finds it, truly, I say to you, he rejoices over it more than over the ninety-nine that never went astray.”

Did Jesus weigh which was better, having safe the 99 and abandoning the one? Some might have argued that by leaving the 99 to search out the lost one, the shepherd left the 99 at risk of being ravaged by wild animals, or some other such downfall. But, the Good Shepherd sought out the lost one, nonetheless. Should we do less?

The bill isn’t perfect, of course, but I fail to see the logic behind a pro-lifer voting against a bill banning most (unfortunately, not all) abortions after 20 weeks of conception when the alternative, the status quo ante, is legalized abortion until right before birth.

Among the Republicans who voted against it, Hanna is no surprise: he is by far the two most reflexively pro-abortion Republican in the House (with the defeat if Biggert and Bass last year, Hanna really has no competition). Dent and Frelinghuysen are also pro-abortion, but they sometimes vote the right way—not this time. As for Runyon, Broun and Woodall, they are pro-life, but voted like idiots here. Broun is running for the Senate from GA; hopefully a pro-life conservative with more intelligence, such as Karen Handel or Congressmen Phil Gingrey or Jack Kingston, wins the nomination (Broun is also the one Republican candidate who could lose that election, thanks to his public comments favoring Creationism and his sometimes Alliance with Paultards).

Among the Democrats, Lipinski, McIntyre, Peterson and Rahall are consistent pro-life votes, the only four truly pro-life Dems left in Congress. Henry Cuellar usually votes pro-life, and he did here; hopefully his occasional pro-abortion votes last year were an aberration. As for Matheson, he’s no pro-lifer, but generally has voted pro life since the new district maps were released in Utah in late 2011; his pandering won’t be enough to save him from defeat by Mia Love in 2014.

Disappointing votes from Democrats whom I was hoping might support this bill (but knew probably would vote against it given their votes over the past two years: Langevin of RI, Sanford Bishop of GA, Lynch of MA and Kaptur of OH. And no one better mention Barriw of GA and “pro-life” in the same sentence again.

Oh, and the three freshmen Dems whom I thought might be pro-life: Filemon Vela and Pete Gallego of TX and Bill Enyart of IL, proved themselves not to be any such thing.

You are anti-moron (subjectively). I am pro-life. No exceptions. You can be sure that NARAL’s opposition was for far different reasons than A.L.L.’s. But let me ask you then, are you ok with the exception that will allow innocent babies to be brutally ripped apart after 20 weeks, because of the circumstances of their conception?

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.